I support Ukraine, but adamantly oppose sending OUR KIDS over there to be killed!
(nothing personal Ukraine, but I would say the same about nearly any overseas conflict)
<< I support Ukraine, but adamantly oppose sending OUR KIDS over there to be killed! >>
Which is Levin’s position as well. He’s been saying that we should support them with weapons and intel, but not American combat troops. The guy who wrote the Twitter post on which this thread is based is deliberately misrepresenting Levin’s position.
I support Ukraine, but adamantly oppose sending OUR KIDS over there to be killed!(nothing personal Ukraine, but I would say the same about nearly any overseas conflict)
***This conflict is unique because we signed an assurance towards Ukrainian borders and sovereignty when we took away their nukes. As a country, as a world, we need to get nuclear nonproliferation right, otherwise every tinhorn dictator in Africa and other hotspots will be building nukes. It was the right thing to take those nukes from the Ukes, it is the right thing to uphold their sovereignty when they’re invaded.
The way I see it is we should follow the emBASEee strategee. Very AmericaFirsty.
The Budapest Agreement was an “accession” to a signed international United Nations, ratified nuclear nonproliferation treaty. The Ukes honored it and gave up those nukes. The Rukes violated it twice by invading twice, by happenstance it was when there were weak-kneed democrap presidents in office whom Vlad knew would not do anything about an invasion. And the USA has been looking for all kinds of ways to abrogate our responsibility in this treaty/agreement even though it points to disaster down the road for nuclear nonproliferation.
So when I say give back the Ukes their nukes, it is an acknowledgement that nukes are sovereignty. They gave up some nukes in exchange for “assurances” for borders and sovereignty. Since they are in an existential war, who are we to scold them for building nukes since that is what we did when we were in our existential war, and we are the ones who have betrayed them.
If the Ukes develop and deploy a suitcase nuke on a Russian city, it is because they got pushed into an existential corner. What we really should be doing is putting CONVENTIONAL forces into this fight in a way that genuinely “assures” borders and sovereignty for a country that did the right thing. After all, the Russian bear has been shown to be rather toothless compared to what most of us thought they would be in this fight, so the US would kick some serious @$$.
And if we send in American boots on the ground, we damned well better be negotiating American Land as the thing to fight for. Big, sweeping American EmBASEees along the border between Russia and Ukraine. A Lend Lease project. Americans fighting for American land. For generations we could use that land to build airports and fight terrorism in that region. I would call it the BBudapest AAgreement LLend LLease program because it would take BALLs.
from my home page
I have been advocating for several years a policy I call ‘embaseees’. Embassy + AirBase —> EmBASEeees. We go into a terrorist country, clear out their taliban equivalent, then withdraw to very large Embassies, perhaps 3 of them. Have them big enough to encompass a military airbase where we can use it for decades on end to conduct anti-terrorism operations. As long as the ‘host’ country aint killing Americans then we let them have self-sovereignty. Kind of like how we operated in the Phillipines for decades. We could even have an intermediate zone that we patrol but it would be autonomous. Let them have their taste of freedom. A referendum every 10 years to see how large the boundaries of the intermediate autonomous zone should be.
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/4043681/posts
__________________________________________________________
“I support Ukraine, but adamantly oppose sending OUR KIDS over there to be killed!”
Ukraine seems to be holdings its own, and I’m also adamantly opposed to mushroom clouds.